4 - Friday, January 23, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. A420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. Training the humane way 'U' needs to re-evaluate training policy that harms animals E ach year, the lives of approximately 20 dogs end because of an Advanced Trauma Life Support course at the Uni- versity. The class, which operates under the supervision of Dr. Richard Burney, a professor of surgery in the Medical School, allows medical students to practice surgery on live dogs. Because of recent allegations by the Physician's Committee for Responsible Medicine that Burney withheld information from the University to get permission to use canine test subjects, though, this practice has come under fire. Though the situation is complex, if using live dogs for surgery practice is to be continued, the University has a responsibility to demonstrate that it is a superior teaching method with no adequate alternative. If it can't do that, a more humane teaching method should be used. NOTABLE QUOTABLE Celebrity magazines and cocktail party chatter don't build support for senators." - Democratic National Committee member Robert Zimmerman, commenting on Caroline Ken- nedy's failed campaign for Hillary Clinton's vacant Senate seat, as reported by CNN. JASON MAHAKIAN E-MAIL JASON AT MAHAKIAJ@UMICH.EDU. DL ~ -T 8 )ae vWATEA. MAIN B~K m or.M OP AsoQT^ tiv 4. ' / 4 S-- The heat beneath your feet 4 The allegations about the University's practice came last week by the PCRM in a complaint to the U.S. Department of Agricul- ture. Though the complaint recognizes that the University's practice is technically legal, it claims that Burney failed to disclose in his request to the University's Committee on Use and Care of Animals that other, superior testing methods exist for this surgical train- ing. The author of the complaint, Dr. John Pippin, a senior medical and research advi- sor to the PCRM, asserts that failing to men- tion the equally sufficient and more humane methods of surgical training could have been illegal. Since the complaint was filed, the Univer- sity has responded by questioning the cred- ibility of the PCRM and standing behind the choice of its professor. In a statement, the University described the PCRM as an ani- mal rights group receiving substantial fund- ing from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. It also claimed that less than 10 percent of PCRM's members are physicians. In the light of these criticisms, the Univer- sity has said that it will leave the decision about whether to continue the practice up to Burney. That response was insufficient. Though it may not be necessary to turn this situa- tion into an ethical debate about whether it is right to euthanize dogs for the sake of medical training, the University must bet- ter justify why it allows this testing. As the PCRM pointed out, the Medical School has an anatomical human mannequin called TramaMan that is capable of simulating real surgery. The Medical School could also use the more traditional option of operating on human cadavers. If the University wishes to condone the ethically questionable use of live animals as training subjects, it should first certify that there are no better alternatives. Certainly, there could be good reasons the University allows this type of animal test- ing to occur. For one, operating on live dogs might provide a very different psychological experience compared to operating on a man- nequin. But the University hasn't provided reasons like that. Instead, it has left this weighty decision to one professor and subtly dismissed the PCRM's concerns as animal rights propaganda. If the University truly believes that its current method is the only way to train these students, it must demonstrate this - rather than leaving it up to one teacher's opinion. The University has a clear respon- sibility to ensure that its practices are both ethical and useful. W ith record-low tempera- tures locking students in a deep freeze, heating our houses and apart- ments is becoming costly. Summer price hikes in nat- ural gas have led. DTE Energy to sig- nificantly increase gas bills despite more recent drops in market prices, BEN further adding to CALECA the woes of cash- strapped students. The answer to this dilemma - and perhaps the answer to the dilemma of usable clean energy altogether - may rest below our feet. That answer is geothermal heating and energy generation. Geothermal heating and electrical generation are two different processes, but both carry enormous potential for a greener future for people across the country. To generate electricity, geo- thermal power plants use heat from hot underground sources to power electrical generators. Geothermal heat pumps, on the other hand, use pipes beneath a building to regulate temper- atures of the building and the ground. Since underground temperatures remain constant all year, geothermal heat pumps heat buildings in the win- ter and cool them in the summer. But what makes this technology so special? Since geothermal sources don'trequire fossil fuels to extract heat energy and take up a relatively small area, emissions and damageto the local countryside are minimal. Geothermal heat pumps are between 25 and 75 per- cent more efficient for heating and cool- ing than traditional systems depending on where the system is set up and the scale of the heating system. The best part is that geothermal heating and electricity aren't beholden to global markets, weather patterns or the time of day. Regardless of what's. happening on the surface of the Earth, the constant underground tempera- tures mean more stable heating bills for consumers and more clean baseline electricity that can be provided at any time, night or day. Of course, as with any seemingly perfect solution, there are a few catch- es. These geothermal heating systems have been around for decades but cost twice as much to install as traditional heatingunits. Their expense has scared off consumers who don't want to wait a decade to recoup their investment. But with rising energy prices, geother- mal heat pumps are now much more attractive and companies specializing in them have reported significant sales growth. ClimateMaster, the nation's largest manufacturer of ground-source heat pump equipment, saw a revenue increase of 200 percent between 2005 and 2007. Another question is where geother- mal power plants could be placed. For a geothermal plant to work, it's neces- sary to locate hot rocks in the earth. The only way to locate them is by drill- ing, which can wreak environmental havoc if done irresponsibly. Drilling also isn't cheap, making the fixed cost of setting up a plant much higher. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Department of Energy (DOE) estimate the potential for geothermal power in the U.S. to be enormous. The DOE estimates that within four decades, 10to 20 percent of our electricity can come from geother- mal plants if there is enough interest to encourage large-scale investment. Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) currently under development will open up much of the country to geothermal power generation. An investment of around one billion dollars over the next two decades could make this possible. The call is being answered by an. unlikely source. Google recently announced a $10 million initial invest- ment in EGS technology because the company feels the technology is the answer to the green energy. crisis. Google has also announced it is work- ing with General Electric and taking advantage of its steam turbine exper- tise for the initiative. The U.S. Depart- ment of the Interior has also opened up millions of acres of land in 12 western states for geothermal energy explora- tion. Why investing in geothermal heat is a wise decision This is a fantastic start, but the tech- nologyneeds more funding and careful stewardship. Drilling is a very risky, exercise for the environment, with sol- vents and lubricants possibly threaten- ing groundwater. It's great to reduce carbon emissions,but it shouldn't come at the cost of the local environment where a geothermal plant is placed. With energy prices riding a perpetu- al roller coaster and greenhouse emis- sions remaining a huge threat to the environment, part of the answer comes from the ground we walk on. Savings in geothermal heating and electricity would reduce carbon emissionsby mil- lions of tons per year and bringthe U.S. closer to having a viable, sustainable, clean electrical grid. Now, it's up to private and public investment to make this possible. Ben Caleca can be reached at calecab@umich.edu. 4 EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca, Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Matthew Green, Emma Jeszke, Shannon Kellman, Edward McPhee, Emily Michels, Matthew Shutler, Jennifer Sussex, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder BRIAN FLAHERTY VIE I A bus ride that didn't happen 4 During the blizzard-like weather last week- end, I went to the bus stop by the Michigan Union and ran into a nasty surprise - there weren't any buses coming anytime soon. That's because on weekends, University buses don't drive to South Campus, where I had parked my car earlier. So I spent the next half hour trudging through a whiteout in my new sneakers, which. were pretty stylin' but not as warm as I would have hoped. When I finally arrived at my desti- nation, there was a fresh clod of snow roughly the size of Antarctica on my head. And I wasn't the only one disappointed that day. Walking to South Campus, I saw a slew of students making similar treks with expressions that implied their hamsters might have just died. The situation left me wondering why my bus in shining armor had abandoned me. Now, all bus addicts have horror stories about the cold winter night when their ride drove right past their stop or the time they were thrown onto the lap of the stranger sitting nextto them due to some wild driving. Those I can dismiss as infre- quent events. But my walk through the blizzard had its root in a more endemic problem - the unavailability of public transportation during weekends. Just ask someone living on North Campus what they think of public transporta- tion on the weekends. If their response doesn't contain "sucks," "blows," or some sort of exple- tive, they're probably being too polite. The bot- tom line is that students shouldn't have to wait 30 minutes for a bus that might not take them to where they want to go justbecause it's Sunday. That being said, I haven't given up on public transportation. Most of the time, the bus is still a great way to get around. As a third-year com- muter, I have thanked local drivers at least 500 times because proper bus etiquette requires that you always thank the guy or gal behind the wheel, even if that person is dead sick of hear- ing it. And aside from a few mishaps on nights and weekends, I've found my experiences with the bus to be overwhelmingly positive. The-bus is easy, cheap and (generally) reliable. It also has some more sweeping benefits. For one thing, public transportation has a pos- itive impact on the community. It cuts down on traffic, reducing the number of cars on the city's wacky one-way streets. Public transportation also boosts the local economy. According to the American Public Transportation Association, every dollar invested in public transportation puts six dollars into the economy. Not to men- tion that mass transit saves a lot of gas money for impoverished students. Because being green is in style these days, the bus is getting sexier all the time. The APTA esti- mates that public transportation reduces U.S. carbon emissions by 37 million metric tons annu- ally - that's roughly equivalent to the amount of electricity used in every household in New York City, Atlanta, Denver, Los Angeles and Washing- ton, D.C. combined. In the fight against global warming, every little bit helps, and public trans- portation helps more than a little bit. Getting cars off the streets also cuts down on air pollu- tion, so we can all breathe a little easier thanks to the bus. Public transportation is wonderful when it works, and there are a lot of things the Universi- ty does right to keep it working well. That's why I did exactly what I should have - parked my car off campus and planned to take the bus. This particular time, I ended up cold, wet and covered in snow because there are also some things the University does that are ill-advised, like dras- tically reducing weekend bus availability. But public transportation works for the city and it works for the environment. There's no reason it couldn't work more consistently for students. Brian Flaherty is an associate editorial page editor. Repairing racism Last month, I worked on a col- umn for the Daily that explored affirmative action - one of America's infa- mous racial stale- mates. I learned that some Uni- versity students were so reluctant to talk about race, they would only comment anony- mously. MATTHEW While affirma- tive action may HUNTER make some people fraught with anxi- ety, reparations are affirmative action to the 25th power. Reparations involve the Ameri- can government offering some form of compensatory justice to African- Americans for infractions that include the three-fifths clause in 1787, insti- tutional slavery, decades of Jim Crow laws and the blind eye that many courts have shown vigilante groups such as the Ku Klux Klan. Research has shown that Ameri- cans don't like discussing reparations. The idea controversial and highlights a disparity between whites and blacks. A 2002 CNN/USA Today Gallup poll reported that 90 percent of whites believe the government should not pay cash reparations to slave descendants, while 55 percent of black respondents said the government should. Aetna, an insurance company that was sued in 2002 for "their corpo- rate predecessors' roles in the slave trade and conversion of the value of the slaves' labor into their prof- its," responded, "We do not believe a court would permit a lawsuit over events which - however regrettable - occurred hundreds of years ago. These issues in no way reflect Aetna today." The courts dismissed, the case against the company. Some criticsofreparationsmaywon- der: What exactly do we give African- Americans who are the descendants of slaves? Whatdowegive biracialblacks? What do we give Oprah? Furthermore, who pays? Or, more bluntly, who is punished? The fact is, all black people living in America right now experi- ence the social dysfunction that has resulted from America's sordid racial past and deserve compensatory justice from the American government. As for payment and punishment, I don't believe that many of my white classmates who shiver beside me as I walk to class are the same people who constructed the peculiar institution of slavery. In fact, I believe a majority of my white peers would stand in solidar- ity with me if explicitly racist policies emerged today. However, for whites today to believe that a vast majority of them have not benefited economically from these past incidences of racism is to believe a fairy tale. To be clear, it is the responsibility of both whites and blacks to seek justice where there is injustice. Many blacks have been active in their own recovery from past injustices by taking respon- sibility for their present socioeconomic statuses. And many of the racial poli- cies that have been forged in America have been the result of black, brown and white coalitions. It is our respon- sibility as Americans to better under- stand the nature of the social status of the oppressed and not simply blame them for something that is inextricably linked with white oppression. To answer the harder question, that ofwhat togive,Ipropose somethingwe are all too familiar with: a government stimulus package. It would consist of money dedicated toward repairing damage dealt to African-Americans. The money should not simply be given to individuals -.it should be allotted to state governments to rebuild their oppressed communities. With this, we could see drastic improvements for schools, jobs, rehabilitation programs, community infrastructure and Afri- can-American morale. A 2003 New York Times article titled "The Cost of Slavery" estimates that, after inflation, payment for lost wages to slaves would be between $2 Reparations are necessary to right past injustices. trillion and $4 trillion. Would a $4 tril- lion stimulus package be an appropri- ate allocation to make up for the past? Either way, it should serve as a number that reminds us of the seriousness of slavery and lasting oppression. And, if this is a stretch, what public policy measures could mitigate the oppres- sive damages of more than 300 years? What can the government do to help heal the wounds and correct the dys- function? Perhaps the words of President Obama are fitting in this.case: "I con- sistently believe that when it comes to whether it's Native Americans or African-American issues or repara- tions, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds." I hope he lives up to his words - we need big deeds. Matthew Hunter can be reached at majjam@umich.edu. 4 4 4 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. Letters are edited for-style, length, clarity and accuracy. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu. 4